Defender is one of the weakest traits if not the weakest traits in FFH, so I suggest to improve it a bit. Giving them better forts was already proposed, which I think is a good idea, but it is IMO not enough, so I suggest to add +20% healing rate in your cities and +10% healing rate everywhere else in your own cultural borders. Another possibility would be to give all your units +1 overall strength in your borders (or +0 offense +2 defense) and -1 strength (or -2 offense -0 defense) in enemy cultural borders and no changes in neutral terrain. Both possibilities would have a real advantage in fighting the early barbarian forces (Hasn't FF something similar to my second suggestion for the Elohim?) and you would actually be happy to have this trait. As it is right now you could give the Elohim leaders as well only Philosophical (Einion) or Creative (Ethne) and it would make no big difference.
Improving defender
- Thread starter Imuratep
- Start date
cabbagemeister
Please wait...
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2008
- Messages
- 517
I like the healing rate idea, but I think adding raw strength to Defender units would be a bit over the top. The point of Defender is to make cities more difficult to take; this would push it into the realm of impossible, even if the Elohim had a massive tech deficit (3/5 warriors from turn 1? 3/7 archers??? You'd have a tough time fighting that with Champions).
Another idea: what if Defender did 5-10% damage to enemy units every time they entered your territory? This would really slow an invading stack down (since you'd have to re-enter the Defender's territory after capturing each city) without making an assault unfeasible.
Another idea: what if Defender did 5-10% damage to enemy units every time they entered your territory? This would really slow an invading stack down (since you'd have to re-enter the Defender's territory after capturing each city) without making an assault unfeasible.
Turinturambar
Prince
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2005
- Messages
- 368
I gave leaders with the defender trait the "double bonus from fortification promotion" as an additional free promotion. It fits the flavor and with that change the trait seems to be about as good as the others.
Withdrawal isn't weak, why does everyone ignore it when talking about the homeland promotion?
Elohim can have the same withdraw crazy cavalry that Hippus get. 50 from flanking 1-3, 10 from homeland, and 25 and 35 for base depending on the cavalry type. 95 withdrawal horse archers are not weak, they're frigging cheese comparable to attack spells. If you run the order tree, 85 withdrawal Valin isn't too shabby at all, and the over council has better chariots to take advantage of it too.
God forbid you capture yourself a Hippus stable and build the Ride in it. 100% withdrawal starting cavalry anyone?
Elohim can have the same withdraw crazy cavalry that Hippus get. 50 from flanking 1-3, 10 from homeland, and 25 and 35 for base depending on the cavalry type. 95 withdrawal horse archers are not weak, they're frigging cheese comparable to attack spells. If you run the order tree, 85 withdrawal Valin isn't too shabby at all, and the over council has better chariots to take advantage of it too.
God forbid you capture yourself a Hippus stable and build the Ride in it. 100% withdrawal starting cavalry anyone?
heisenberg
Lost in Erebus
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
- Messages
- 337
Agreed. I'd honestly put 10% withdrawal > 10% str in home territory anytime. I definitely try to go down the calvary line on defensive leaders--as Psycloak said, you can rack up some serious withdrawal rates with defensive leaders+flanking allowing you to toss your calvary units at heavily fortified cities with impunity.
To illustrate Psycloak's point further, a generic defensive civ running say apprenticeship early on would be able to pop out horsemen/chariots with 55% with flanking I, one victory later they should be able to obtain flanking II and 75%. Say mid-game on with horse archers (35% base) and suppose you run apprenticeship+conquest and especially if you had form of the titan you'd be building out 85% withdrawal units straight out from the stables. (later on hippodromes would be able to replace titan if you didn't have it)
I'd say that though the defensive withdrawal bit is kinda situational (mostly useful on calvary), it does open up some interesting possibilities. Only defensive leader that I has issues with the calvary line would be Amelanchier, who lacks war chariots. However, his midgame Frydwells are simply awesome, Raider+Defensive withdrawal is a Calvary's wet dream. Not to mention they also have the elven trait to move through forests fast as well. Then again, with Ljosalfar's archery emphasis, their cities are very well protected with defensive.
To illustrate Psycloak's point further, a generic defensive civ running say apprenticeship early on would be able to pop out horsemen/chariots with 55% with flanking I, one victory later they should be able to obtain flanking II and 75%. Say mid-game on with horse archers (35% base) and suppose you run apprenticeship+conquest and especially if you had form of the titan you'd be building out 85% withdrawal units straight out from the stables. (later on hippodromes would be able to replace titan if you didn't have it)
I'd say that though the defensive withdrawal bit is kinda situational (mostly useful on calvary), it does open up some interesting possibilities. Only defensive leader that I has issues with the calvary line would be Amelanchier, who lacks war chariots. However, his midgame Frydwells are simply awesome, Raider+Defensive withdrawal is a Calvary's wet dream. Not to mention they also have the elven trait to move through forests fast as well. Then again, with Ljosalfar's archery emphasis, their cities are very well protected with defensive.
Similar threads
